Supertrees disentangle the chimerical origin of eukaryotic genomes

Molecular Biology and Evolution

Volumn 24, Issue 8, 2007, Pages 1752-1760

  Pisani, Davide ^a   Cotton, James A ^a   McInerney, James O ^a  

^a NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF IRELAND   (Ireland)

Author keywords

Eukaryote origins; Network of life; Phylogenomics; Supertrees; Tree of life

Indexed keywords

ARCHAEBACTERIUM; ARTICLE; CHIMERA; CONTROLLED STUDY; CYANOBACTERIUM; EUKARYOTE EVOLUTION; GENOME ANALYSIS; NONHUMAN; PHYLOGENY; PROTEOBACTERIA; SYMBIOSIS;

ARCHAEA; BACTERIA; DNA, MITOCHONDRIAL; EUKARYOTIC CELLS; EVOLUTION, MOLECULAR; GENES, ARCHAEAL; GENOME, ARCHAEAL; GENOME, BACTERIAL; MITOCHONDRIA; MODELS, GENETIC; PHYLOGENY;

ARCHAEA; BACTERIA (MICROORGANISMS); CYANOBACTERIA; EUKARYOTA; EURYARCHAEOTA; PROKARYOTA; PROTEOBACTERIA; THERMOPLASMATALES;

EID: 34547751897     PISSN: 07374038     EISSN: 15371719     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/molbev/msm095     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Archie JW. 1989. A randomization test for phylogenetic information in systematic data. Syst Zool. 38:219-225.
2. Baum BR. 1992. Combining trees as a way of combining data sets for phylogenetic inference, and the desirability of combining gene trees. Taxon. 41:3-10.
3. Beiko RG, Harlow TJ, Ragan MA. 2005. Highways of gene sharing in prokaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 102:14332-14337.
4. Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 1999. Archaea sister group of Bacteria? Indications from tree reconstruction artifacts in ancient phylogenies. Mol Biol Evol. 16:817-825.
5. Burleigh JG, Driskell AC, Sanderson MJ. 2006. Supertree bootstrapping methods for assessing phylogenetic variation among genes in genome-scale data sets. Syst Biol. 55:426-440.
6. Castresana J. 2000. Selection of conserved blocks from multiple alignments for their use in phylogenetic analysis. Mol Biol Evol. 17:540-552.
7. Cavalier-Smith T. 2002. The phagotrophic origin of eukaryotes and phylogenetic classification of Protozoa. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 52:297-354.
8. Charlebois RL, Doolittle WF. 2004. Computing prokaryotic gene ubiquity: rescuing the core from extinction. Genome Res. 14:2469-2477.
9. Ciccarelli FD, Doerks T, von Mering V, Creevey CJ, Snel B, Bork P. 2006. Toward automatic reconstruction of a highly resolved tree of life. Science. 311:1283-1287.
10. Creevey CJ, Fitzpatrick DA, Philip GK, Kinsella RJ, O'Connell MJ, Pentony MM, Travers SA, Wilkinson M, McInerney JO. 2004. Does a tree-like phylogeny only exist at the tips in the prokaryotes? Proc Biol Sci. 271:2551-2558.
11. Creevey CJ, McInerney JO. 2005. Clann: investigating phylogenetic information through supertree analyses. Bioinformatics. 21:390-392.
12. Dagan T, Martin W. 2006. The tree of one percent. Genome Biol. 7:118.
13. de Duve C. 2007. The origin of eukaryotes: a reappraisal. Nat Rev Genet. 8:395-403.
14. Delsuc F, Brinkmann H, Philippe H. 2005. Phylogenomics and the reconstruction of the tree of life. Nat Rev Genet. 6:361-375.
15. Doolittle WF. 1999. Phylogenetic classification and the universal tree. Science. 284:2124-2129.
16. Doolittle WF, Bapteste E. 2007. Pattern pluralism and the Tree of Life hypothesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 104:2043-2049.
17. Embley TM, Martin W. 2006. Eukaryotic evolution, changes and challenges. Nature. 440:623-630.
18. Esser C, Ahmadinejad N, Wiegand C, Rotte C, Sebastiani F, Gelius-Dietrich G, Henze K, Kretschmann E, Richly E, Leister D, Bryant D, Steel MA, Lockhart PJ, Penny D, Martin W. 2004. A genome phylogeny for mitochondria among alpha-Proteobacteria and a predominantly eubacterial ancestry of yeast nuclear genes. Mol Biol Evol. 21:1643-1660.
19. Esser C, Martin W, Dagan T. 2006. The origin of mitochondria in light of a fluid prokaryotic chromosome model. Biol Lett. 3:180-184.
20. Fitzpatrick DA, Logue ME, Stajich JE, Butler G. 2006. A fungal phylogeny based on 42 complete genomes derived from supertree and combined gene analysis. BMC Evol Biol. 6:99.
21. Gogarten JP, Doolittle WF, Lawrence JG. 2002. Prokaryotic evolution in light of gene transfer. Mol Biol Evol. 19:2226-2238.
22. +-ATPase: implications for the origin of eukaryotes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 86:6661-6665.
23. Goldenfeld N, Woese C. 2007. Biology's next revolution. Nature. 445:369.
24. Gribaldo S, Philippe H. 2002. Ancient phylogenetic relationships. Theor Popul Biol. 61:391-408.
25. Iwabe N, Kuma K, Hasegawa M, Osawa S, Miyata T. 1989. Evolutionary relationship of archaebacteria, eubacteria, and eukaryotes inferred from phylogenetic trees of duplicated genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 86:9355-9359.
26. Keane TM, Creevey CJ, Pentony MM, Naughton TJ, McInerney JO. 2006. Assessment of methods for amino acid matrix selection and their use on empirical data shows that ad hoc assumptions for choice of matrix are not justified. BMC Evol Biol. 6:29.
27. Kurland CG, Collins LG, Penny D. 2006. Genomics and the irreducible nature of eukaryote cells. Science. 312:1011-1014.
28. Lake JA. 2007. Disappearing act. Nature. 446:983.
29. Lapointe FJ, Cucumel G. 1997. The average consensus procedure: combination of weighted trees containing identical or overlapping sets of taxa. Syst Biol. 46:306-312.
30. Lemmon AR, Moriarty EC. 2004. The importance of proper model assumption in bayesian phylogenetics. Syst Biol. 53:265-277.
31. Lopez-Garcia P, Moreira D. 2006. Selective forces for the origin of the eukaryotic nucleus. Bioessays. 28:525-533.
32. Margulis L, Chapman M, Guerrero R, Hall J. 2006. The last eukaryotic common ancestor (LECA): acquisition of cytoskeletal motility from aerotolerant spirochetes in the Proterozoic Eon. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 103:13080-13085.
33. Martin W, Hoffmeister M, Rotte C, Henze K. 2001. An overview of endosymbiotic models for the origins of eukaryotes, their ATP-producing organelles (mitochondria and hydrogenosomes), and their heterotrophic lifestyle. Biol Chem. 382:1521-1539.
34. Martin W, Muller M. 1998. The hydrogen hypothesis for the first eukaryote. Nature. 392:37-41.
35. McInerney JO. 2006. On the desirability of models for inferring genome phylogenies. Trends Microbiol. 14:1-2.
36. McInerney JO, Wilkinson M. 2005. New methods ring changes for the tree of life. Trends Ecol Evol. 20:105-107.
37. Pace NR. 2006. Time for a change. Nature. 441:289.
38. Pisani D. 2004. Identifying and removing fast-evolving sites using compatibility analysis: an example from the Arthropoda. Syst Biol. 53:978-989.
39. Pisani D, Wilkinson M. 2002. Matrix representation with parsimony, taxonomic congruence, and total evidence. Syst Biol. 51:151-155.
40. Ragan MA. 1992. Phylogenetic inference based on matrix representation of trees. Mol Phylogenet Evol. 1:53-58.
41. Rivera MC, Jain R, Moore JE, Lake JA. 1998. Genomic evidence for two functionally distinct gene classes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 95:6239-6244.
42. Rivera MC, Lake JA. 2004. The ring of life provides evidence for a genome fusion origin of eukaryotes. Nature. 431:152-155.
43. _. 1992. Evidence that eukaryotes and eocyte prokaryotes are immediate relatives. Science. 257:74-76.
44. Searcy DG, Hixon WG. 1991. Cytoskeletal origins in sulfurmetabolizing archaebacteria. Biosystems. 25:1-11.
45. Swofford DL. 1998. PAUP*. Phylogenetic analysis using parsimony (*and other methods). Sinauer Associates, Sunderland, Massachusetts
46. Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ. 1994. CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Res. 22:4673-4680.
47. Timmis JN, Ayliffe MA, Huang CY, Martin W. 2004. Endosymbiotic gene transfer: organelle genomes forge eukaryotic chromosomes. Nat Rev Genet. 5:123-135.
48. Wilkinson M, Cotton JA, Creevey C, Eulenstein O, Harris SR, Lapointe FJ, Levasseur C, McInerney JO, Pisani D, Thorley JL. 2005a. The shape of supertrees to come: tree shape related properties of fourteen supertree methods. Syst Biol. 54:419-431.
49. Wilkinson M, Cotton JA, Lapointe FJ, Pisani D. 2007a. Properties of supertree methods in the consensus setting. Syst Biol. 56:330-337.
50. Wilkinson M, McInerney JO, Hirt RP, Foster PG, Embley TM. 2007b. Of clades and clans: terms for phylogenetic relationships in unrooted trees. Trends Ecol Evol. 22:114-115.
51. Wilkinson M, Pisani D, Cotton JA, Corfe I. 2005b. Measuring support and finding unsupported relationships in supertrees. Syst Biol. 54:823-831.
52. Woese CR, Fox GE. 1977. Phylogenetic structure of the prokaryotic domain: the primary kingdoms. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 74:5088-5090.
53. Woese CR, Kandler O, Wheelis ML. 1990. Towards a natural system of organisms: proposal for the domains Archaea, Bacteria. Eucarya. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 87:4576-4579.